Ongoing conversations: realising an emancipatory rural politics in the face of authoritarian populism

The need for a new narrative to counter authoritarian
populism, one that is popular, inclusive and progressive was a common call – also
cross-class, intersectional and human rights grounded.

Filipino artist Boy Dominguez presented his work at the ERPI conference, explaining its political messages.Nearly 300 academics and activists gathered over a weekend
recently at the International Institute of Social Studies in The Hague for an
extraordinary, highly animated conversation about ‘authoritarian
populism and the rural world’. 80
odd papers prepared and read in advance were discussed in groups and
plenary sessions. Not a single powerpoint was used, and horizontal, inclusive
discussions were encouraged on the origins and consequences of authoritarian populism
in different places, the forms of resistance and mobilisation emerging and the
alternatives being practised and proposed. It was intense, stimulating and
exhausting, and there’s much to digest. You can get a flavour of the excitement
at #ERPI2018.
Not a single powerpoint was used, and horizontal,
inclusive discussions were encouraged on the origins and consequences of
authoritarian populism.

The openDemocracy
series of articles on India, Kurdish Rojava, the United States, Brazil,
Indonesia, Myanmar, Colombia and South Africa give a taste of some of the
issues discussed; although at the event there were contributions from around 50
countries. Comparing and contrasting everywhere from Cambodia to Canada and
Brazil to Belarus was challenging: there are important convergences, but also
major differences.

What, then, does the rise of such different forms of
authoritarian populism mean for rural peoples around the world? Many themes emerged.
Some were more conceptual and generic, some were quite specific to particular
places. Below are five themes that struck me; necessarily a very personal and
selective list.

Authoritarian
populisms

The term ‘authoritarian populism’ we used to frame
the conference was intensely debated. Was this not just ‘right-wing’ or
‘reactionary’ politics; does this not denigrate and undermine ‘the popular’;
was this in any way new? The answers depend on particular contexts of course.

Populism
has different resonances in different political cultures; sometimes more
positive, sometimes negative. But Stuart
Hall’s delineation of authoritarian populism seems to apply in many places
today. We see the deployment of a ‘them’ and ‘us’ narrative being used to
generate a collective but exclusionary political project.

We see the generation of ‘moral panic’, providing the
justification for surveillance and suppression. We see the deployment of
‘political technologies’ that constrain and discipline, whether this is food
prohibitions or electronic identity cards.

And we see the rise of authoritarian populism as a response
to a ‘crisis’ in the economic base – today, forms of extractivist,
financialised neoliberalism – and, in turn, being used as a route to mobilise
and reconfigure the state.

Of course all this plays out in different ways in different
places and different periods in history, but the basic features, however
theorised, are evident. Today, this also has an international axis, with
connections being made between political leaders, movements and the electorate,
facilitated by the increasingly sophisticated deployment of data
mining, targeted messaging and political mobilisation, supported by often
very wealthy benefactors.

Dangers of co-option

Authoritarian populism is not the exclusive preserve of ‘the
right’, as the ambiguity of populist framings means that there is a wide
co-option of ideas and interventions normally the preserve of progressive
movements.

In rural settings, we see subsidy policies, social welfare
support and local economic development, alongside trade protection, sovereignty
and anti-globalisation narratives, being promoted by right-wing, authoritarian
regimes. We heard of the struggles in rural Germany
where in a single village proto-fascist groups and progressive agroecological
farmers are both arguing for local determination and autonomy.

This means there is sometimes a ‘slippery
slope’ between progressive and regressive mobilisations, with an easy capture
or co-option of movements. At the meeting, we heard of the struggles in rural
Germany where in a single village proto-fascist groups and progressive
agroecological farmers are both arguing for local determination and autonomy.
In India, we heard of the BKU – the Bharatiya
Kisan Union – a farmers’ movement
proclaiming anti-Muslim Hindutva ideology, yet being a core member of the
global peasants’ movement, La Via Campesina.

The need for a new narrative to counter authoritarian
populism, one that is popular, inclusive and progressive was a common call
across the event.

Religion and moral
solidarities

Religion was a common theme; one not often discussed in
gatherings on agrarian issues. Religious belief and emotional, affective, moral
dimensions may be a blind-spot of the left, some argued. The appeals of moral
certainty offered by evangelical Christian movements in the US, Hindutva
organisers in India, Buddhist leaders in Myanmar and Islamic nationalists in
Indonesia, for example, are important in mobilising forms of
religiously-inflected authoritarian populism.

The counter to this cannot be ignoring religion and moral
orders, but an imperative to engage. Of course all world religions have
progressive traditions; how to mobilise in relation to religious institutions
becomes crucial. Talk radio shows in the US, we heard, provide a powerful
space, but the millions of listeners are almost completely captured by the
narratives of authoritarian, religious populism. New forms of organising,
linking people in new ways, and getting out of isolating, introspective ghettos,
while taking religion seriously, seems crucial. New
forms of organising, linking people in new ways, and getting out of isolating, introspective
ghettos, while taking religion seriously, seems crucial.

Mobilisations:
dangers and opportunities

Mobilisation under new political configurations and
increasingly closed democratic spaces, is challenging in many places.

A violent, repressive state can make organising extremely
dangerous, especially when supported by politically or religiously inspired militia, youth cadres
or wider movements, whether the Sangh Parivar in India
or radical Buddhist movements in Myanmar.
In The Hague, we recognised the loss of life of land
and environment defenders around the world, the imprisonment and expulsion
of academics in Turkey and beyond and, most recently, the assassination of Marielle
Franco, an activist and elected councillor from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

With such repressive closing down, how can emancipatory
alternatives emerge? There were in fact many, many inspiring examples
presented, from small-scale farming and marketing initiatives creating
territorial renewal to approaches to popular education in peasant and
pastoralist schools. From Brazil,
we heard of the Landless Workers’ Movement’s on-going commitment to popular
education, including a strategy of a ‘long march through the institutions’,
including schools, universities and more.

In repressive settings, the challenge of opening up
institutions – whether the police, the legal system, the media or science – is
a continuous struggle, requiring sustained engagement.

New alliances and
ways of organising

The challenge of mobilisation and the creation of
alternatives is one that clearly must transgress the focus on ‘the rural’ to
link the countryside and urban areas, workers and peasants, producers and
consumers, so cutting across class, gender, age, ethnicity and religion. Many contributions at the meeting highlighted the
importance of wider connections.

While the
focus of the ERPI remains rural and agrarian – as we still feel that this
dimension is missed out in many wider discussions – many contributions at the
meeting highlighted the importance of wider connections.

There was much talk too of the importance of cross-class
mobilisation and the importance of intersectional analysis and organising. The
links to a wider human rights discourse was frequently emphasised; not least by
Sofia
Monsalve in the final plenary session, when she argued that our concerns
with emancipatory politics are central to human rights struggles worldwide.

But the challenges of generating and sustaining alternatives
are very real. The need for ‘big
organising’, and being bolder, more imaginative and less constrained by
internal differences was a common theme – maybe even taking an idea or two from
the ruthless organising capacities of the authoritarian, populist right.

In turn, Hilary Wainwright argued
for going beyond narrow ‘resolution’ to a more open, less controlling form of
leadership and organising that can connect people and ideas beyond old divides.

What next?

These five themes offer only a small glimpse of the rich
discussions over an intensive two days. The follow-up to the ERPI event in The
Hague will involve both further analysis and action. The many papers that were
produced will be honed and refined thanks to the debates authors had;
opportunities for connection and solidarity have been struck around on-going
campaigns and struggles, with concrete plans for visits and exchanges.

The elaboration of emancipatory alternatives and
mobilisation around these will continue, but with new ideas and opportunities
for mutual support and exchange. While the
ERPI is a small, limited initiative, many seeds have been sown for a wider,
informal flourishing of actions, and the connections made for on-going
conversations that can generate a new hopeful narrative for emancipatory rural
politics globally.

About the author

Ian Scoones is a professorial fellow at the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, and co-director of the ESRC STEPS Centre. Email: ians@ids.ac.uk

The Emancipatory Rural Politics Initiative (ERPI) was launched during 2017 as a response to the rise of authoritarian populism
in different parts of the world. Our focus is on the rural origins and
consequences of authoritarian populism, as well as the forms of
resistance and variety of alternatives that are emerging.

In March 2018, a major ERPI event was held in The Hague, the Netherlands, bringing together around 300
researchers and activists from across five continents. While ERPI small grant
holders presented research insights, debates focused on
mobilizing alternatives, generating new research-activist networks
across the world. Watch this space.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.
If you have any queries about republishing please contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.

Recent comments

openDemocracy is an independent, non-profit global media outlet, covering world affairs, ideas and culture, which seeks to challenge power and encourage democratic debate across the world. We publish high-quality investigative reporting and analysis; we train and mentor journalists and wider civil society; we publish in Russian, Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese and English.